Engine Testing - 99.0-RC5

[lamer]

Is rewrite of weapon/targeting system finished? If it's not - i won't spam bug reports. If it's done...
1) 98.0.1-711-g2e953b6 runs ~1.5x times slower than 98.0.1-451-g0804ae1 for me;
2) game speed in ZK drops twice during armraven's (catapult), armbanth's (bantha) rocket salvo (while rockets flying).
Did anyone experience something similar? Yet I didn't look for the broken part: could be zk, gcc-5.1 or engine.

[abma]

1) 98.0.1-711-g2e953b6 runs ~1.5x times slower than 98.0.1-451-g0804ae1 for me;

thats way to unspecific. what are you doing? thats nothing that could be "fixed". its similar to feedback that "everything sucks".

[lamer]

I was testing native ai 1vs1 in zk. With 451-engine at 20-30th minute mark i have speed 9-5x but with 711 i have only 5-2x. Probably it's just the consequence of (2) issue i described. Needs more testing, maybe with zk-benchmark.

[raaar]

I think the going down hills slows units bug is a blocker for release.

Your link is not correct Are you talking about this? https://springrts.com/mantis/view.php?id=4791

I can confirm this too. It should be fixed.

On 98.0 a thud goes from about 40 speed to half when going up in a ramp, but suffers no penalty when going down the ramp.

On the RC5 he suffers the same penalty going up or down the ramp.


The ideal behavior isn't simple though :
- it makes sense for units to suffer penalty if going up ramps (of any kind)
- it makes sense for a unit to not suffer any penalty when going down gentle ramps
- it makes sense for a unit to still suffer penalty when going down steep ramps ?

the way unit speed for ground units is applied isn't fully 3D, if slopemod=0 (speed penalty is disabled) on the movedefthey move as fast on the horizontal plane regardless of the slope. Looks weird for units that can climb steep slopes, like spiders.

A way to "solve" it is to just make it so the suffers from a lighter penalty (half?) when going down slopes and only applied if the slope is steeper than maxSlope/2.

[hokomoko]

I was testing native ai 1vs1 in zk. With 451-engine at 20-30th minute mark i have speed 9-5x but with 711 i have only 5-2x. Probably it's just the consequence of (2) issue i described. Needs more testing, maybe with zk-benchmark.

I've tested armraven a bit and actually got different results.
Can you make sure you're using the same settings for both?

EDIT: on a different matter, ZK benchmark showed a significant perf drop on 704 vs. 451.
I'll try to profile that and see what's the cause.

[lamer]

Well, ignore issue (1) then.
But about (2). Steps to reproduce:
a) BA 8.17
/cheat
/give 100 armraven
shoot nearby position
Compare lags of 98.0.1-711-g2e953b6 with 98.0.1-451-g0804ae1.
b) ZK 1.3.5.1
/cheat
/give 20 armraven
shoot nearby position
With 98.0.1-711-g2e953b6 simFrame goes up to 120 ms, when with 98.0.1-451-g0804ae1 it's 18 ms in my case.

But there are already new commit to targeting/weapon system, should check again.

[hokomoko]

Hmm, yes, I can recreate this lag.
I'll try to bisect it.

[hokomoko]

Please compare:
1) 98.0.1-720-ge72088d
2) 98.0.1-721-g30eee0d
3) 98.0.1-451-g0804ae1

[lamer]

Regarding armraven's salvo:
1) 98.0.1-720-ge72088d - avgSimFrame 118 ms
2) 98.0.1-721-g30eee0d - avgSimFrame 20 ms
3) 98.0.1-451-g0804ae1 - avgSimFrame 20 ms
e.g. 98.0.1-721-g30eee0d fixes issue

EDIT: (don't want to spam posts)
98.0.1-451-g0804ae1 (12cai_no_plop ZKL_default) - 71.3129959106 (speedy_dt)
98.0.1-451-g0804ae1 (12cai_no_plop ZKL_default) - 69.5089950562
98.0.1-720-ge72088d (12cai_no_plop ZKL_default) - 115.5149917603
98.0.1-720-ge72088d (12cai_no_plop ZKL_default) - 121.9989929199
98.0.1-721-g30eee0d (12cai_no_plop ZKL_default) - 81.5099945068
98.0.1-721-g30eee0d (12cai_no_plop ZKL_default) - 74.2179946899
I guess perf is fine with 98.0.1-721-g30eee0d.

[hokomoko]

Great!
And regarding general perf?

[Silentwings]

Just fyi, it's now reached the stage where I'm getting requests to add a widget into BA/BAR to change the default camera to match 98.0. I cannot find a single forum post that supported having the new Spring camera as the default, and iirc literally everyone who responded objected to the change. As far as I can see I've no choice but to agree and add a widget to enforce the old default.

[jamerlan]

He he, I made that request..
but because springlobby settings have no support for these spring cam parameters yet. People will be frustrated

Update: created ticket for springlobby https://github.com/springlobby/springlobby/issues/471

[Silentwings]

You weren't the only person to request it. I don't view SL as being involved with this really, although it does already support choosing the default camera mode. Changing the default camera to something brand new that hasn't been tested much, with a recent history of many bugs, that was uniformly not wanted as the default, is just mad imo.

Anyways, I'm tired of pointing this out, so http://imolarpg.dyndns.org/trac/balates ... r_mode.lua is there for anyone who wants it.

[raaar]

is it the rotation, or the zoom out, or both?

the rotation is what screws it for me.

Does anyone other than the devs support it? Why isn't it reverted?

[FLOZi]

Not 100% sure yet, but looks like interceptor weapons may be broken, MCL AMS and LAMS don't work, double checking it isn't a game side issue.


edit: Confirmed working in 98, This is a major issue for MCL

[hokomoko]

ZK antinuke also doesn't work, seems like all interceptors are broken.

[abma]

ZK antinuke also doesn't work, seems like all interceptors are broken.

is this fixed? next time please report bugs to mantis, in forum they'll get easily lost!

next test/release candidate: RC6 viewtopic.php?f=12&t=33587

[Google_Frog]

ZK antinuke also doesn't work, seems like all interceptors are broken.

is this fixed? next time please report bugs to mantis, in forum they'll get easily lost!

next test/release candidate: RC6 viewtopic.php?f=12&t=33587

You needed to look closer https://springrts.com/mantis/view.php?id=4799

[Silentwings]

next test/release candidate: RC6 viewtopic.php?f=12&t=33587